In addition to decision-making, reasoning is also closely related and followed. Reasoning can often be described and divided into two types: deductive and inductive. Deductive reasoning involves reasoning from general statements, while inductive reasoning is the process of reasoning from specific facts. During this process, heuristics are often used to speed up the reasoning end result that may or may not lead to the correct conclusion. This paper will discuss how cognitive psychologists view these types of reasoning along with the influence heuristics have on reasoning.
It’s about 12:30pm and I can see in my review mirror two girls, one 12-year-old and one 8-year-old, walking towards the car while making hand movements and eye rolling. I’m picking up my nieces on one of their half days and the bickering bath and forth between the two of them is nothing but routine. As I attempt to calm the situation and atmosphere I say to them, “If you both want to go get something to snack on and ice cream later, then I suggest you stop the arguing.” Most likely because they are both hungry, as I suspected, tranquility has entered my car and they begin talking about their day at school. Neither was actually explicitly told to stop arguing, yet they both made a logical inference. The inference made is nothing more than an example of how reasoning is at work in the brain.
No matter what topic of discussion or situation one is involved in, a series of decisions and reasoning behind those decisions are made. The ability to have decision making skills and choosing among alternatives depends on the cognitive ability of one’s reasoning. Reasoning is the process of information, which goes beyond any premise, with the aim of being categorized into two types: inductive and deductive. Inductive reasoning is an omnipresent mental activity that encompasses using existing knowledge in order to produce new knowledge that is most likely, although not fail-safe, to be true. It is also necessary in order for an individual to fill in any cracks within their knowledge with presumptions and speculations about the condition of the world. Deductive reasoning, on the other hand, is related to syllogisms that include logic from more generalized statements. Many cognitive psychologist use and have applied inductive and deductive reasoning in developing appropriate expectations and strategies. ADD MORE REDO
Deductive reasoning refers to the usage of proper rules that includes logic structures that produce new knowledge guaranteed to be true on the basis that the available knowledge presented is true as well. Deductive reasoning is built on syllogisms that include a series of statements, premise 1, premise 2, and a conclusion. Categorical syllogisms can be used as a model form in describing the relationship between the two categories by using statements that begin with all, no, or some (Goldstein, 2011). For example:
Premise 1: All birds are animals.
Premise 2: All animals eat food.
Conclusion: Therefore, all birds eat food. The above premise offers evidential support for the end conclusion, however it does not guarantee its truth, but rather good reasoning. Not only can valid syllogisms result in false conclusions, but syllogisms can be invalid even though each of the premises and the conclusion seem reasonable (Goldstein, 2011). Another model that is more commonly used everyday are conditional syllogisms. Conditional syllogisms have two premises and a conclusion, like one above, but the first premise has the form “If and then” (Goldstein, 2011). For example: Premise 1: If it’s a robin, then it’s a bird. Premise 2: It’s a bird. Conclusion: Therefore, it’s a robin.
Validity and truth play a major role in whether the reasoning has logic to it or not. However, logic should be differentiated from